Bird v Jones - him his right to go where he pleased. b....

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
CASE: Bird v. Jones Court: Queen’s Bench P100 (torts) COLERIDGE Facts a. Plaintiff/Bird Defendant/Jones b. Part of public highway was enclosed. Plaintiff was opposed by defendant, after brief struggle, plaintiff climbed over fence. He was met by two policeofficers who told him that he couldn’t ho that way. Plaitiff stood there unharmed for awhile until he finally went the way allowed. c. (1) C/A: false imprisonment (2) relief requested: N/A (3) defenses raised: Procedural History: a. Lower court’s ruling(s): in favor of plaintiff b. Damages awarded: ? c. Appellant: Defendant Issues: a. substantive issue (i) Was this an intense of false imprisonment? (ii) plaintiff declares that the obstruction of the public streets falsely imprisoned him for denying
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: him his right to go where he pleased. b. procedural issue: did the lower court rule correctly. Disposition (judgment): Reversed. Holding: There was no false imprisonment because the Plaintiff had a way out. Rule of Law or Legal Principle Applied: “There must be restraint within some limits defined by a will or power exterior to our own.” Reasoning: Because the Plaintiff had the freedom to get out of where he was there was no false imprisonment. Concurring/Dissenting Opinions: Dissenting LORD DENMAN: he believed that the plaintiff’s wish to exercise his right of way was obstructed by the company holding the event and thus was imprisoned. Additional Comments/Personal Impressions:...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 10/21/2009 for the course ??? Torts I taught by Professor Ragan during the Fall '09 term at Florida Coastal School of Law.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online